Bush put his lying face on TV

[borntorun0102]

and said, "I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predictions_of_hurricane_risk_for_New_Orleans


There were many predictions of hurricane risk in New Orleans before the strike of Hurricane Katrina in August 2005. Due to the city's unique geography as well as its levee system and the decrease of surrounding marshland, there have been various plans to mitigate or prevent such an event from being catastrophic, but none were carried out at the time of Katrina. Ongoing strengthening and raising of levees in the area, such as along the outer Mississippi, is primarily intended to contain river flooding.

Official assessment
A category 5 hurricane directly striking New Orleans was calculated to be a one in 500 year event by the Army Corps of Engineers [1]. The Corps of Engineers, along with Louisiana State University (LSU), and the authorities in Jefferson Parish have modeled the effects and aftermath of a Category 5 strike on New Orleans. The outcome was an unprecedented disaster, with extensive loss of life and property. The key problem is an effect called "filling the bowl", when the hurricane drives water into Lake Pontchartrain, which overwhelms weaker levees bordering Pontchartrain and canals leading to it and flows into the below-sea-level city accompanied by water overtopping the levees along the Mississippi on the south side of the city center.

The tall levee walls surrounding New Orleans then prevent the water from naturally draining back out to sea. Dr. Joseph Suhayda, former director of the Louisiana Water Resources Research Institute and former professor at LSU, has been a driving force behind this research and advocacy of planning for the worst. Suhayda's worst case scenario is a Category 4 or 5 storm which approaches New Orleans directly from the south.

In September 2002, the American RadioWorks aired a documentary, Hurricane Risk for New Orleans, describing the modeling efforts at LSU, the Army Corps of Engineers and the Jefferson Parish Emergency Management Center, the results, and possible long-term solutions. The official budget was highlighted as being far below requirements and is already being considered for increase. There has been criticism of the funding for hurricane preparedness of New Orleans.

"The design of the original levees, which dates to the 1960s, was based on rudimentary storm modeling that, it is now realized, might underestimate the threat of a potential hurricane. Even if the modeling was adequate, however, the levees were designed to withstand only forces associated with a fast-moving hurricane that, according to the National Weather Service’s Saffir-Simpson scale, would be placed in category 3. If a lingering category 3 storm — or a stronger storm, say, category 4 or 5 — were to hit the city, much of New Orleans could find itself under more than 20 ft (6 m) of water" (The Creeping Storm, June 2003 Issue of Civil Engineering Magazine).

The January 25, 2005 Louisiana Sea Grant forum (part of an LSU college program) discussed the results of several simulations of strong hurricanes hitting New Orleans. The presentations and animations from the forum are accessible to the public at the forum's website.

In early 2001, FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency of the US Federal Government, listed a hurricane hitting New Orleans as one of the three most serious threats to the nation. The other two were a terrorist attack in New York City and a large earthquake hitting San Francisco.

[edit]
In-depth media reports
In 2002, the New Orleans Times-Picayune published an award-winning five-part series called Washing Away [2] that covered various scenarios (including a Category 5 hurricane hitting the city from the south) and explored the various environmental changes that have increased the area's vulnerability. One article in the series concluded, "Hundreds of thousands would be left homeless, and it would take months to dry out the area and begin to make it livable. But there wouldn't be much for residents to come home to. The local economy would be in ruins."

The American Prospect carried "Thinking Big About Hurricanes" on May 23, 2005. That article described the likely aftermath of a major storm surge. "Soon the geographical "bowl" of the Crescent City would fill up with the waters of the lake, leaving those unable to evacuate with little option but to cluster on rooftops — terrain they would have to share with hungry rats, fire ants, nutria, snakes, and perhaps alligators. The water itself would become a festering stew of sewage, gasoline, refinery chemicals, and debris."

Popular Mechanics ran a story in September of 2001 called New Orleans Is Sinking discussing what might happen if a hurricane of this size landed on New Orleans.

Scientific American published an article by Mark Fischetti in October of 2001 called Drowning New Orleans. This article begins, "A major hurricane could swamp New Orleans under 20 feet of water, killing thousands. Human activities along the Mississippi River have dramatically increased the risk, and now only massive reengineering of southeastern Louisiana can save the city… New Orleans is a disaster waiting to happen."

The National Geographic Magazine published a feature in its October 2004 issue titled Gone With the Water. The article's primary focus is on the destruction of the Mississippi delta's wetlands and the effects that this has on the region's ability to withstand a hurricane, in addition to ecological and social impacts. The article begins with a haunting hypothetical worst-case scenario.

The PBS science show Nova aired an episode on the hurricane threat to New Orleans in January 2005, including interviews with New Orleans officials and scientists involved in the LSU study. The episode is available for online viewing here.

The June 2005 FX docudrama Oil Storm depicted a category 4 hurricane hitting New Orleans that forced residents to evacuate and hide out in the Superdome. It went on to speculate about a national economic meltdown caused by the decreased oil supply.

In 2001, The Houston Chronicle published a story, Keeping its head above water: New Orleans faces doomsday scenario which predicted that a severe hurricane striking New Orleans "would strand 250,000 people or more, and probably kill one of 10 left behind as the city drowned under 20 feet of water. Thousands of refugees could land in Houston."

The November 2004 edition of Natural Hazards Observer carried an article entitled What if Hurricane Ivan Had Not Missed New Orleans?, which suggested "The potential for such extensive flooding and the resulting damage is the result of a levee system that is unable to keep up with the increasing flood threats from a rapidly eroding coastline and thus unable to protect the ever-subsiding landscape." [3]


Disastrous predictions have come true. Katrina, a category 4 storm at landfall, brushed by New Orleans but breached the levees of Lake Ponchartrain, which was several meters above the elevation of New Orleans--which itself was mostly lower than sea level.

As of August 31, 2005, 80% of the city was flooded up to the level of the lake. The only element missing from this scenario is that the Mississippi River was not also overpouring its banks and flooding the city.

The US Corps of Engineers starting in 1920 built the levees (aka dikes) to withstand category 3 hurricanes, and Katrina was a strong category 4. Scientific and engineering studies have long predicted that New Orleans would be eventually washed away by hurricanes and the Mississippi River, although the likelihood of this event happening in the near future was low.

In the wake of Hurricane Katrina
The adequacy of funding for hurricane preparedness of New Orleans has been questioned in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Since 2001, many U.S. Army Corps of Engineers requests for hurricane protection projects have been cut back or delayed. Critics charge that these cutbacks were a direct result of funding for the Iraq war and the Bush Administration's tax cuts. Others argue that it is common for projects like these to be underfunded and even had the remaining 25% of funding requests been filled, it would not have helped New Orleans withstand a category 4 hurricane.

Southeast Louisiana Project funding:

2004:
Army Corps request: $11 million
Bush request: $3 million
Approved by Congress: $5.5 million
2005:

Army Corps request: $22.5 million
Bush request: $3.9 million
Approved by Congress: $5.7 million
2006:

Bush request:$2.9 million
[edit]
Articles
The Chicago Tribune wrote "Despite continuous warnings that a catastrophic hurricane could hit New Orleans, the Bush administration and Congress in recent years have repeatedly cut funding for hurricane preparation and flood control. The cuts have delayed construction of levees around the city and stymied an ambitious project to improve drainage in New Orleans' neighborhoods."

Editor and Publisher reported that "after 2003, the flow of federal dollars toward SELA dropped to a trickle. The Corps never tried to hide the fact that the spending pressures of the war in Iraq, as well as homeland security -- coming at the same time as federal tax cuts -- was the reason for the strain. At least nine articles in the Times-Picayune from 2004 and 2005 specifically cite the cost of Iraq as a reason for the lack of hurricane- and flood-control dollars." He also wrote "In early 2004, as the cost of the conflict in Iraq soared, President Bush proposed spending less than 20 percent of what the Corps said was needed for Lake Pontchartrain, according to a 16 February 2004, article, in New Orleans CityBusiness."

The Newhouse News Service said "In its budget, the Bush administration had also proposed a significant reduction in funding for southeast Louisiana's chief hurricane protection project. Bush proposed $10.4 million, a sixth of what local officials say they need."

However, the levee failures appear to have occurred on areas of levee that had already been funded, but not hardened or reinforced. The main breach, on the 17th St. Canal was of a concrete wall levee constructed in the last two years.

"Levees would have been higher, levees would have been bigger, there would have been other pumps put in, I'm not saying it would have been totally alleviated but it would have been less than the damage that we have got now." Mike Parker, former Mississippi congressman who headed the Corps from 2001 to 2002
Sidney Blumenthal, from the Clinton Administration, appeared as a guest on BBC's The World 2005/09/01 (archives). Blumenthal claimed that the Bush Administration had specifically diverted approved money at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers from water and storm protection efforts to be used instead by the Corps in Iraq. As a result, the Corps had performed only last-minute and substandard reinforcement of levees some of which subsequently failed. It is unclear that better construction would have held, but was clear that inferior construction had failed.

[orthy]

get the number from 1992 to 2000. They tell the same story simpleton.

[mhafinancial]

get the number from 1992 to 2000. They tell the same story simpleton.
So you're saying mediocrity is OK?

That the people of New Orleans didn't deserve better?

Let's simply focus on the past few years, where the Corps requested money, and Bush chose instead to piss it down that stinkhole in Iraq.

Because like it or not, when the dead are counted and the refugees safe, that is where this is going, and where it deserves to go.

[orthy]

So you're saying mediocrity is OK?

That the people of New Orleans didn't deserve better?

Let's simply focus on the past few years, where the Corps requested money, and Bush chose instead to piss it down that stinkhole in Iraq.

Because like it or not, when the dead are counted and the refugees safe, that is where this is going, and where it deserves to go.

Mediocrity is not OK. But, six months ago you would have been bitching about the budget being $25m more in the hole for "infrastructure repairs" in New Orleans. 7 years ago, I may have been bitching. Bottom line is the area couldn't have withstood a catagory 4-5 hurricane since the day it was built. And the money in the form of local, state, or federal, has never been there. And if Katrina passed and never reached New Orleans it still would not be there. And if Hillary were to become president in 2008 (knocking on my head), two years later it still would not have been there...That does not make it right, its just a damn fact...

[dhenise]

So you're saying mediocrity is OK?

That the people of New Orleans didn't deserve better?

Let's simply focus on the past few years, where the Corps requested money, and Bush chose instead to piss it down that stinkhole in Iraq.

Because like it or not, when the dead are counted and the refugees safe, that is where this is going, and where it deserves to go.

MHA,

Your liberal rhetoric is really getting tiresome. "know since the 1920's" ........ and yet you want to bash the president who DOES release funds. Was NO the only city that has needed federal help? Was it the only issue we've had to deal with? Since you know all the wonders of the democratic party, please tell me what Clinton did to help. By the way ...... what has the state and local government done to fix the problem over the years?

[mhafinancial]

MHA,

Your liberal rhetoric is really getting tiresome. "know since the 1920's" ........ and yet you want to bash the president who DOES release funds. Was NO the only city that has needed federal help? Was it the only issue we've had to deal with? Since you know all the wonders of the democratic party, please tell me what Clinton did to help. By the way ...... what has the state and local government done to fix the problem over the years?

They asked for $30 million. What's that, a week's interest on what we are spending in Iraq? I bet the 10,000 dead in New Orleans and the hundreds of thousands homeless feel much safer now that Saddam is gone.

As I said on another thread:


:noway: :noway: :noway:


What part didn't you like?

The part where I said Bush isn't responsible for the hurricane?

Or the part where I said Bush probably isn't responsible for the levee failure?

Or the part where I said the slow response lies at his doorstep?

In case you guys don't understand what I meant,

1) Bush isn't repsonsible for the hurricane.

2) Bush is 99.99% most likely not repsonsible for the levee break, because it is likely that even if funded as requested by the Corps, a breech could have occurred.

3) The response of his team lies securely at his feet.

And Dave, you never did respond to which of those three issues you were shaking your head at. Surely you can't think the hurricane was Bush's fault. And I am sure you don't think that Bush is responsible for the levee break and the flooding that followed. So therefore you must think that the President is not responsible for a timely follow-up to save citizens in event of a national disaster. Which explains why you believe in Bush so strongly.

Here is an editorial from the NO Times-Picayune:

NEW YORK The Times-Picayune of New Orleans on Sunday published its third print edition since the hurricane disaster struck, chronicling the arrival, finally, of some relief but also taking President Bush to task for his handling of the crisis, and calling for the firing of FEMA director Michael Brown and others.


We heard you loud and clear Friday when you visited our devastated city and the Gulf Coast and said, "What is not working, we’re going to make it right."

Please forgive us if we wait to see proof of your promise before believing you. But we have good reason for our skepticism.

Bienville built New Orleans where he built it for one main reason: It’s accessible. The city between the Mississippi River and Lake Pontchartrain was easy to reach in 1718.

How much easier it is to access in 2005 now that there are interstates and bridges, airports and helipads, cruise ships, barges, buses and diesel-powered trucks.

Despite the city’s multiple points of entry, our nation’s bureaucrats spent days after last week’s hurricane wringing their hands, lamenting the fact that they could neither rescue the city’s stranded victims nor bring them food, water and medical supplies.

Meanwhile there were journalists, including some who work for The Times-Picayune, going in and out of the city via the Crescent City Connection. On Thursday morning, that crew saw a caravan of 13 Wal-Mart tractor trailers headed into town to bring food, water and supplies to a dying city.

Television reporters were doing live reports from downtown New Orleans streets. Harry Connick Jr. brought in some aid Thursday, and his efforts were the focus of a "Today" show story Friday morning.

Yet, the people trained to protect our nation, the people whose job it is to quickly bring in aid were absent. Those who should have been deploying troops were singing a sad song about how our city was impossible to reach.

We’re angry, Mr. President, and we’ll be angry long after our beloved city and surrounding parishes have been pumped dry. Our people deserved rescuing. Many who could have been were not. That’s to the government’s shame.

Mayor Ray Nagin did the right thing Sunday when he allowed those with no other alternative to seek shelter from the storm inside the Louisiana Superdome. We still don’t know what the death toll is, but one thing is certain: Had the Superdome not been opened, the city’s death toll would have been higher. The toll may even have been exponentially higher.

It was clear to us by late morning Monday that many people inside the Superdome would not be returning home. It should have been clear to our government, Mr. President. So why weren’t they evacuated out of the city immediately? We learned seven years ago, when Hurricane Georges threatened, that the Dome isn’t suitable as a long-term shelter. So what did state and national officials think would happen to tens of thousands of people trapped inside with no air conditioning, overflowing toilets and dwindling amounts of food, water and other essentials?

State Rep. Karen Carter was right Friday when she said the city didn’t have but two urgent needs: "Buses! And gas!" Every official at the Federal Emergency Management Agency should be fired, Director Michael Brown especially.

In a nationally televised interview Thursday night, he said his agency hadn’t known until that day that thousands of storm victims were stranded at the Ernest N. Morial Convention Center. He gave another nationally televised interview the next morning and said, "We’ve provided food to the people at the Convention Center so that they’ve gotten at least one, if not two meals, every single day."

Lies don’t get more bald-faced than that, Mr. President.

Yet, when you met with Mr. Brown Friday morning, you told him, "You’re doing a heck of a job."

That’s unbelievable.

There were thousands of people at the Convention Center because the riverfront is high ground. The fact that so many people had reached there on foot is proof that rescue vehicles could have gotten there, too.

We, who are from New Orleans, are no less American than those who live on the Great Plains or along the Atlantic Seaboard. We’re no less important than those from the Pacific Northwest or Appalachia. Our people deserved to be rescued.

No expense should have been spared. No excuses should have been voiced. Especially not one as preposterous as the claim that New Orleans couldn’t be reached.

Mr. President, we sincerely hope you fulfill your promise to make our beloved communities work right once again.

When you do, we will be the first to applaud.

[HeldUp]

David, your liberal use of bold is killing my eyes. Stop it. ;)

[mhafinancial]

David, your liberal use of bold is killing my eyes. Stop it. ;)
Happy?

[admiralkosmos]

Happy?

Proud as hell to have you on this Board. Thank God in heaven someone like you does put in the time and energy to unmask this administration - although for those of us with no agenda, it's pretty damn obvious what Bush and Co. (Corp.?) do day in and day out to run this country into the ground.

5 years from now? Financial disaster. Just you wait. Then all those people screaming at you and others for being "liberals" will be eating crow - and little else, on the soup line. :manson:

[mhafinancial]

Proud as hell to have you on this Board. Thank God in heaven someone like you does put in the time and energy to unmask this administration - although for those of us with no agenda, it's pretty damn obvious what Bush and Co. (Corp.?) do day in and day out to run this country into the ground.

5 years from now? Financial disaster. Just you wait. Then all those people screaming at you and others for being "liberals" will be eating crow - and little else, on the soup line. :manson:
Thanks. I think I'm blushing.

While I know it is all but pointless...they'll never change my way of thinking, and I highly doubt I'll ever change theirs...I do feel it is important to try and remove the smoke, so if they look in the mirror they might not like what they see.

How anyone could support this charlatan is beyond me.

BTW - we do still have a Vice President, don't we? Haven't heard much from him lately.... a mixed blessing indeed.

[orthy]

5 years from now? Financial disaster. Just you wait. Then all those people screaming at you and others for being "liberals" will be eating crow - and little else, on the soup line. :manson:

HAHAHA, good one Admiral. I'll keep that in mind in five years as I watch our country continue to thrive.. I'll bet you think that the current economy is in dire straits too. You keep on seeing whatever it is you want to see. And in 08 when Cheney is elected it will continue to thrive. Just as I hope your misery continues. Cause the glass half empty life you lead must be revolting. And for that I'm glad, very glad.

[mhafinancial]

....And in 08 when Cheney is elected it will continue to thrive....
More likely it would go down as the darkest day in American history, making Pearl Harbor and 9/11 look like Mardi Gras.

Unless, of course, one has their jackboots polished. Then they can join the parade.

[orthy]

More likely it would go down as the darkest day in American history, making Pearl Harbor and 9/11 look like Mardi Gras.

Unless, of course, one has their jackboots polished. Then they can join the parade.

Jackboots are polished, have been since November.

Jesus H., and now with Judge Roberts leading the charge for the next 40 years, well, its a good day. Not even you could deny this justice his due. Great article on the selection, if you haven't read it.

http://www.hillnews.com/thehill/export/TheHill/Comment/Morris/index.html

[TIES2]

Let's see, by my estimation it took about 2 hours and 36 minutes for the finger pointing to begin. Perhaps finger-pointing will surpass baseball as the national pastime. Any way you look at it, what happened in New Orleans was a disaster of epic proportions. But to suggest that if we weren't in Iraq this would not have happened is insane. As if the money spent in Iraq was originally earmarked to rebuild New Orleans' aging levee system. I don't recall any presidential candidate in recent memory listing as a top priority the rebuilding of New Orleans' levees!

And why bother? After all, the major levee break occurred in a newly built levee financed with federal dollars (recent federal dollars) that the self-congratulating Army Corp of Engineers declared amid great fanfare to be "hurricane proof," hailing it a marvel of modern engineering technology. :rolleyes: The Army Corp of Engineers has a spotty track record, at best.

First, let's consider that New Orleans is not our only vulnerability.

Directly from Hurricane researchers: A Category 5 storm striking the Tampa area would cause more than $25B in insured losses and more than $50B in total losses. The clean up, restoration of services (basic services) would take months. Job and economic recovery would take years.

But that's not the worst of it. A single major Hurricane (say if Katrina had been the same category 4 monster she was when she hit New Orleans) striking the heart of Miami-Dade and Broward counties would generate insured losses of $61B and total losses in excess of $120B (no estimates on loss of life).

Also on that list is New York City -- a less intense storm would cause total losses in the $53B range (do any remember the tunnel and rail flooding that occurred in the October '92 Halloween storm???? And that was only a Nor'easter, which are often called Winter's hurricanes).

Orin Pilkey from Duke University has been cautioning about unchecked coastal growth since the 60s, with little success. As more and more people flock to the coast, storms will cause more and more damage and loss of life. Not because the storms are stronger, but because there are more buildings and people in the way.

Barrier islands are nature's first defense against storms. They actually help protect the mainland. They are meant to be dynamic and change shape, etc. However, once man interferes and buildings go up, the barrier island is no longer able to provide the fluid movement and defense nature intended. The efforts of the Army Corps of Engineers to hold back the sea are noble, but largely ineffective. In some cases, they do more harm than good.

Those of you who live in New Jersey only have to look at Island Beach State Park versus Seaside Park. Seaside Park sits further east than Island Beach State Park. That's because Seaside Park is developed and jetties and what not are used to keep the barrier island in a fixed position. Island Beach State park is in its natural fluid state and has migrated west as nature intended. Jetties and other similar anti-erosion efforts tend to rob sand from one area, which causes sections of beach to widen and other sections to deteriorate. This can also be seen in Florida where Ft. Lauderdale Beach sits further east than Hollywood Beach (largely a result of which side of Port Everglades inlet (with its massive jetties) each sits).

In conclusion, it is clear that the threat of hurricanes and increasing coastal development leaves many areas of this country extremely vulnerable to the forces of nature.

But that's not our only vulnerability. According to researchers a major cataclysmic west coast earthquake is a reality just waiting to happen. Loss of life, infrastructure, etc. will be extraordinary and will probably rival Katrina in its scope and devastation.

We have other vulnerabilities, too. The Federal Highway Administration estimates that approximately 25% of our Nation's 600,000 bridges and tunnels are classified as structurally deficient and in need of urgent repair. That does not take into account the additional reinforcement of these structures advocated to help reinforce them against terrorist attacks (an oft-cited priority among those posting here. Perhaps not specifically in reference to shoring up bridges and tunnels, but the need, in general, to do more to reinforce our domestic vulnerabilities)

Then, of course, there is the porosity of our borders. The aging of our nation's airline fleet. The vulnerability of our seaports, the dismal state of our education system, the failing of our healthcare system, the aging of our population and the problems it will generate.

Fact is, the list goes on and on and on and on. Yet, typically, you hear nothing about any of these things until something happens that catapults it to the forefront.

Regardless of whether we should or should not be in Iraq, Iraq is not the only money drain. What about the US Space program? Do we really need to fund possible exploration of Mars in the face of crumbling levees and failing infrastructure in the US?

The recent cost of the US Space program:

$19.4B in FY03; $20B in FY04, $19.8B in FY05 and a projected $22.5B in FY06.

Seems excessive to me, yet I have not read one comment here or elsewhere questioning why we are funding a space program when the levees in New Orleans are crumbling.

[Flory Days]

Let's see, by my estimation it took about 2 hours and 36 minutes for the finger pointing to begin. Perhaps finger-pointing will surpass baseball as the national pastime. Any way you look at it, what happened in New Orleans was a disaster of epic proportions. But to suggest that if we weren't in Iraq this would not have happened is insane. As if the money spent in Iraq was originally earmarked to rebuild New Orleans' aging levee system. I don't recall any presidential candidate in recent memory listing as a top priority the rebuilding of New Orleans' levees!

And why bother? After all, the major levee break occurred in a newly built levee financed with federal dollars (recent federal dollars) that the self-congratulating Army Corp of Engineers declared amid great fanfare to be "hurricane proof," hailing it a marvel of modern engineering technology. :rolleyes: The Army Corp of Engineers has a spotty track record, at best.

First, let's consider that New Orleans is not our only vulnerability.

Directly from Hurricane researchers: A Category 5 storm striking the Tampa area would cause more than $25B in insured losses and more than $50B in total losses. The clean up, restoration of services (basic services) would take months. Job and economic recovery would take years.

But that's not the worst of it. A single major Hurricane (say if Katrina had been the same category 4 monster she was when she hit New Orleans) striking the heart of Miami-Dade and Broward counties would generate insured losses of $61B and total losses in excess of $120B (no estimates on loss of life).

Also on that list is New York City -- a less intense storm would cause total losses in the $53B range (do any remember the tunnel and rail flooding that occurred in the October '92 Halloween storm???? And that was only a Nor'easter, which are often called Winter's hurricanes).

Orin Pilkey from Duke University has been cautioning about unchecked coastal growth since the 60s, with little success. As more and more people flock to the coast, storms will cause more and more damage and loss of life. Not because the storms are stronger, but because there are more buildings and people in the way.

Barrier islands are nature's first defense against storms. They actually help protect the mainland. They are meant to be dynamic and change shape, etc. However, once man interferes and buildings go up, the barrier island is no longer able to provide the fluid movement and defense nature intended. The efforts of the Army Corps of Engineers to hold back the sea are noble, but largely ineffective. In some cases, they do more harm than good.

Those of you who live in New Jersey only have to look at Island Beach State Park versus Seaside Park. Seaside Park sits further east than Island Beach State Park. That's because Seaside Park is developed and jetties and what not are used to keep the barrier island in a fixed position. Island Beach State park is in its natural fluid state and has migrated west as nature intended. Jetties and other similar anti-erosion efforts tend to rob sand from one area, which causes sections of beach to widen and other sections to deteriorate. This can also be seen in Florida where Ft. Lauderdale Beach sits further east than Hollywood Beach (largely a result of which side of Port Everglades inlet (with its massive jetties) each sits).

In conclusion, it is clear that the threat of hurricanes and increasing coastal development leaves many areas of this country extremely vulnerable to the forces of nature.

But that's not our only vulnerability. According to researchers a major cataclysmic west coast earthquake is a reality just waiting to happen. Loss of life, infrastructure, etc. will be extraordinary and will probably rival Katrina in its scope and devastation.

We have other vulnerabilities, too. The Federal Highway Administration estimates that approximately 25% of our Nation's 600,000 bridges and tunnels are classified as structurally deficient and in need of urgent repair. That does not take into account the additional reinforcement of these structures advocated to help reinforce them against terrorist attacks (an oft-cited priority among those posting here. Perhaps not specifically in reference to shoring up bridges and tunnels, but the need, in general, to do more to reinforce our domestic vulnerabilities)

Then, of course, there is the porosity of our borders. The aging of our nation's airline fleet. The vulnerability of our seaports, the dismal state of our education system, the failing of our healthcare system, the aging of our population and the problems it will generate.

Fact is, the list goes on and on and on and on. Yet, typically, you hear nothing about any of these things until something happens that catapults it to the forefront.

Regardless of whether we should or should not be in Iraq, Iraq is not the only money drain. What about the US Space program? Do we really need to fund possible exploration of Mars in the face of crumbling levees and failing infrastructure in the US?

The recent cost of the US Space program:

$19.4B in FY03; $20B in FY04, $19.8B in FY05 and a projected $22.5B in FY06.

Seems excessive to me, yet I have not read one comment here or elsewhere questioning why we are funding a space program when the levees in New Orleans are crumbling.This is not the finger-pointing point. The point is the federal governments lack of response to this tragedy. For that, a connection to our commitment of human resources to Iraq cannot be denied. It has to be either Iraq, or an enormous lack of concern. In either case, the Bush administration should be held accountable.

[TIES2]

This is not the finger-pointing point. The point is the federal governments lack of response to this tragedy. For that, a connection to our commitment of human resources to Iraq cannot be denied. It has to be either Iraq, or an enormous lack of concern. In either case, the Bush administration should be held accountable.


You'll have to prove it and you can't. The Bush Administration is not the culprit here. If you want to blame anyone, blame the Army Corp of Engineers who could not seem to build a levee worthy of its praise. A levee designed to withstand hurricanes. If you want to point to who failed, that's the organization to be pointing the finger at. Or what about the city of New Orleans who should have had a comprehensive disaster plan in place. Or the State of Louisiania.

That you think that the burden here falls squarely on the shoulders of this administration is pure nonsense. You're just blind or ignorant or both.

You simply cannot accept that s*it happens. There are no guarantees (no, not even in our constitution!) that you get to live everyday the way you lived the day before or that'll you leave your house in the morning and return home unscathed in the evening. You cannot look backward on this one. Could've. Shoud've. Would've. I'm not saying it's not a disaster. I've already said that it was. I also wondered why they could not get there sooner, but blaming the administration is just ridiculous. Watching the scene unfold on TV screens is a lot different than the reality of the situation, which is largely beyond comprehension. Yes, even yours!

[On Highway 29]

TIES2,

Do you think the feds are prepared to handle a terrorist attack if it comes in the shape of a dirty bomb, a chemical explosion, etc.

[TIES2]

I guess that depends what you mean by handle.... I suspect it would also depend on the scope of the attack and the severity of the attack.... do I think that in every city and nook and cranny of this country we are prepared to handle something like that? Probably not....I would suspect certain areas of the country are more prepared than others, but even in big cities like NY, Washington, LA, etc., mayhem would be the order of the day. I don't see how it could be anything but. I really don't know how you prepare for something like that.

But like the Cat 5 Hurricane, they are expecting it...

Let me ask you a question....do you and your family have a plan (or multiple plans) in the event of such an attack or are you depending on the government to save your a**?

[On Highway 29]

Let me ask you a question....do you and your family have a plan (or multiple plans) in the event of such an attack or are you depending on the government to save your a**?

Yes, I expect my government to do that. Isn't the government's job to defend and protect its citized? If it's not and the government isn't going to save my a**, I don't want to pay any more taxes. I'll use that money to build a bunker similar to the one that's built to house White House officials and members of Congress and their families.

Why should they get saved and not my family?

[TIES2]

So you don't have a plan and you are far more delusional than I thought. We wouldn't want to pay the taxes it would require for our government to build us the airtight bubble it would require to keep us in the safety net you imagine. I can't believe you think it' the government's responsibility to keep your butt out of harm's way in the event of another catastrophic hurricane, major 9.0 plus earthquake or nuclear attack.

You have to be a major league whiner...not to mnetion entitlement-driven and unbelievably me-centered....you must be an absolute delight to have around!

[On Highway 29]

Your criticism of me seems a bit harsh.

If it's not the government's job to do these things, why do we have all the security measures at airports? Why did we pass the Patriot's Act?

If the government's job isn't to protects its citizens, then what is its job?

[borntorun0102]

get the number from 1992 to 2000. They tell the same story simpleton.


I've been looking and I can't find any source listing the budget numbers from 1995-2003. Only that SELA was created in '95 after 6 people died in flooding that year. And that 430 million was spent between 95-05, 50 million of that local money, and that Bush slashed the budget after 03, according to ACOE, to divert the funds to Iraq. That ACOE said it needed 250 million more to complete the project. That the levees that broke had not been finished, local contractors had been working on those levees for free trying to finish them since 03.

430 million minus 50 million equals 380 million federal money. Minus 11.2 million for 04 and 05 equals 368.8 federal money from 96-03 for and average of 46.1 million a year.

If you have other figures, please enlighten us.

And y'know, the name calling doesn't add weight to your arguments or legitemacy to your opinions. It just makes you sound like you're 12.

[Flory Days]

Boy we must have hit a nerve of some kind because you usually don't get involved in petty attacks on those of us who might disagree with you.

I don't know what you want me to prove. All I said was the federal government did not respond to this disaster. The proof is evident because the Feds didn't show up for four days, meanwhile news reporters, airline flights and private supply shipments were coming through without delay.

Yes I expect the federal government to protect and rescue all citizens to the best of its ability. Am I going to wait for them to save me? No, but I might have more means to take care of myself. What are the uneducated, elderly, sick and poor people to do? Where do you go if you have no car or money?

Kudos to the state of Texas for stepping up. Our federal government can and must do better.

[TIES2]

Boy we must have hit a nerve of some kind because you usually don't get involved in petty attacks on those of us who might disagree with you.

I don't know what you want me to prove. All I said was the federal government did not respond to this disaster. The proof is evident because the Feds didn't show up for four days, meanwhile news reporters, airline flights and private supply shipments were coming through without delay.

Yes I expect the federal government to protect and rescue all citizens to the best of its ability. Am I going to wait for them to save me? No, but I might have more means to take care of myself. What are the uneducated, elderly, sick and poor people to do? Where do you go if you have no car or money?

Kudos to the state of Texas for stepping up. Our federal government can and must do better.

Sorry. But I stand behind my original assessment that it was the province of the Mayor and Governor to understand what calamities would befall New Orleans in the event of a Cat 5 storm (that it was only a Cat 4 and jogged to the right should be something that they are hopefully down on their knees thanking God for, though I doubt it).

What are the uneducated, elderly, sick and poor people to do? Where do you go if you have no car or money?

That right there is the reason the Mayor ad Governor blew it. They should have erred on the side of caution and taken everyone out prior to the storm. Of course, that costs money and New Orleans has dodged the bullet before...but it's probably not a good idea to gamble with people's lives. And, furthermore, I don't think they ever had any intention of evacuating these people. Had that been the plan, why open the Superdormas a refuge of last resort. I think the Mayor and Governor have a lot of explaining to do.

And, yes, the government should have been there sooner. I was insane last week that it was taking them so long. Despite that, however, I don't think it is at all appropriate to put 100% of the blame on the Federal Government.

[Flory Days]

Sorry. But I stand behind my original assessment that it was the province of the Mayor and Governor to understand what calamities would befall New Orleans in the event of a Cat 5 storm (that it was only a Cat 4 and jogged to the right should be something that they are hopefully down on their knees thanking God for, though I doubt it).

What are the uneducated, elderly, sick and poor people to do? Where do you go if you have no car or money?

That right there is the reason the Mayor ad Governor blew it. They should have erred on the side of caution and taken everyone out prior to the storm. Of course, that costs money and New Orleans has dodged the bullet before...but it's probably not a good idea to gamble with people's lives. And, furthermore, I don't think they ever had any intention of evacuating these people. Had that been the plan, why open the Superdormas a refuge of last resort. I think the Mayor and Governor have a lot of explaining to do.

And, yes, the government should have been there sooner. I was insane last week that it was taking them so long. Despite that, however, I don't think it is at all appropriate to put 100% of the blame on the Federal Government.
I think we might be in general agreement here. There is enough blame to go around. I don't understand why you so vigorously defend the federal government, when you just admitted that it was insane that it took them so long. :scratch:

[mhafinancial]

I think we might be in general agreement here. There is enough blame to go around. I don't understand why you so vigorously defend the federal government, when you just admitted that it was insane that it took them so long. :scratch:
Jekyl and Hyde?

[TIES2]

I think we might be in general agreement here. There is enough blame to go around. I don't understand why you so vigorously defend the federal government, when you just admitted that it was insane that it took them so long. :scratch:


I defend the federal government only to the point that they should not burden 100% of the blame. Having said that, however, I do not hold them blameless for taking so long to rescue the folks stranded in New Orleans. That portion of the blame they deserve. But others had a role to play and failed to deliver. The Mayor. The Governor. The blame can be equally distributed. It starts with the Mayor and goes up and down the ladder on both sides of the political divide. Many posting here, however, in typical fashion, place 100% of all blame on the administration. And that's the part I vigorously defend. The administration is not 100% to blame.

[TIES2]

Jekyl and Hyde?

I prefer to think of it as flexible versus rigid :roll:

[Flory Days]

I defend the federal government only to the point that they should not burden 100% of the blame. Having said that, however, I do not hold them blameless for taking so long to rescue the folks stranded in New Orleans. That portion of the blame they deserve. But others had a role to play and failed to deliver. The Mayor. The Governor. The blame can be equally distributed. It starts with the Mayor and goes up and down the ladder on both sides of the political divide. Many posting here, however, in typical fashion, place 100% of all blame on the administration. And that's the part I vigorously defend. The administration is not 100% to blame.
So..........doesn't matter. When my kids misbehave I teach them to search for their part in what went wrong. They may not have been 100% wrong, but they still have their responsibility no matter what some other kids did. They do not need to defend their behavior because somebody else did or did not do something.

[TIES2]

So..........doesn't matter. When my kids misbehave I teach them to search for their part in what went wrong. They may not have been 100% wrong, but they still have their responsibility no matter what some other kids did. They do not need to defend their behavior because somebody else did or did not do something.

I have ne eliminated anyone from responsibility. I'm merely trying to point out that many parties are responsible. It's other libs here who refuse to see beyond the whitehouse, not me.

[dhenise]

It's other libs here who refuse to see beyond the whitehouse, not me.

Some things never change ........ just please tell me you aren't surprised. :p

[Flory Days]

I have ne eliminated anyone from responsibility. I'm merely trying to point out that many parties are responsible. It's other libs here who refuse to see beyond the whitehouse, not me.Again, what's the big deal? The Feds (Bush) are supposed to work for all of us. We see and are impacted by their leadership (or lack thereof) on a daily basis across a variety of issues. The Governor and Mayor work for the people of Louisiana and New Orleans, respectively. If their names were not in the news, I would venture to say most of us on Live Daily wouldn't even know who they were much less anything about them. It is only natural to look at the devil you know first.

[mhafinancial]

Some things never change ........ just please tell me you aren't surprised. :p
You guys are just pissed that there are no scurrilous bj's or glowing economic reports coming out of the White House these days, just war, death and destruction.

I bet you miss the good old days.

[murphy]

David and Mark,

Did either of you vote for an elected official of the federal government (Senator or Congressman or even local official) that are actually still serving in office??? If so why no go to them and ask where was the aid to the gulf?? No it is much easier to continue on the attack of the administration in office who I hate to break this news to you is only a part of the federal government you are blaming for everything known to mankind.

I am sure that had katrina hit when clinton was in office clinton himself would have dragged monica down to the gulf, lifted up her skirt and blown katrina back out to sea.

:hah: :zzz: :scratch:

[mhafinancial]

David and Mark,

Did either of you vote for an elected official of the federal government (Senator or Congressman or even local official) that are actually still serving in office??? If so why no go to them and ask where was the aid to the gulf?? No it is much easier to continue on the attack of the administration in office who I hate to break this news to you is only a part of the federal government you are blaming for everything known to mankind.

Glad to see you are still with us.

Next time I'll simply blame an administration that is out of office, since that is what the Republicans usually do.

And I know there is plenty of blame to go around. No question the local/state folks could have done a much better job getting the poorest of the poor out, but after that levee broke it elevated to a new level (no pun intended) that only the feds would have the capability to deal with. And there was no leadership coordinating things. If you disagree, show me where I am wrong. I have an open mind. In fact, if you ever have anything to contribute to any of these discussions other than to say "David (and now Mark)...there you go bashing the administration again", please, feel free to add it.

I am sure that had katrina hit when clinton was in office clinton himself would have dragged monica down to the gulf, lifted up her skirt and blown katrina back out to sea.

:hah: :zzz: :scratch:

I don't think she was blowing from what's under her skirt.

He probably would have left Monica back in Washington, but you can bet your ass he would have either been down there or overseeing rescue operations instead of playing guitar at a fundraiser. He also had professionals running FEMA, not other cowpokes, or horse rasslers or whatever this guy is.

Good luck tomorrow with TM.

[mhafinancial]

David and Mark,

Did either of you vote for an elected official of the federal government (Senator or Congressman or even local official) that are actually still serving in office??? If so why no go to them and ask where was the aid to the gulf??

:hah: :zzz: :scratch:
My Republican Congressman said "Son, we've got $280 billion worth of aid in the Gulf right now, boy". :D

[mhafinancial]

And now for the disappearing $2000.

Frankjly, I don't know if handing out $2000 was the smartest way of going about helping folks, but it was a nice gesture, and may have made some sense. I'd like to say the jury is still out on that, but they came back with a verdict faster than OJ's acquittal.

$2000 debit cards are out. Direct deposit is in. Now that, IMHO, is idiotic. Why are check cashing businesses primarily open in the poorest neighborhoods? Right, you all got it on the first try. Many of the poor do not have bank accounts. So now the Feds will provide an illusion of providing immediate cash to those in need, but how many will really benefit?

I hope someone has thought this thing through better than the first news reports I have seen.

At least Brown is back in DC where he can do less harm

[TIES2]

And now for the disappearing $2000.

Frankjly, I don't know if handing out $2000 was the smartest way of going about helping folks, but it was a nice gesture, and may have made some sense. I'd like to say the jury is still out on that, but they came back with a verdict faster than OJ's acquittal.

$2000 debit cards are out. Direct deposit is in. Now that, IMHO, is idiotic. Why are check cashing businesses primarily open in the poorest neighborhoods? Right, you all got it on the first try. Many of the poor do not have bank accounts. So now the Feds will provide an illusion of providing immediate cash to those in need, but how many will really benefit?

I hope someone has thought this thing through better than the first news reports I have seen.

At least Brown is back in DC where he can do less harm

At least now they have the money to buy the big screen TVs rather than pilfer them. Okay, bad attempt at humor. But it's hard to imagine that these people had more money than what happened to be in their pockets when they clamored to the rooftops. And, putting money in a person's pocket probably does provide a sense of control (it may help ease some of the feelings of desperation). On the other hand, many of these individuals may not be accustomed to having that much money at a clip -- money management may not be a practiced art since there is typically little money to manage.

The fact that the $2k was given to each adult, hardly seems equitable...you could have two adults with no children versus two adults with five children or a single adult with no children or a single adult with three children (you get the idea). Then you have all the people from last year's storms who may not have received anything (there are still many people in Charley's and Ivan's wake who are still living in temporary housing or are otherwise displaced. And many others who were financially wiped out. Since many were elderly, it's a permanent thing for them. They're not in their rebuilding life years, so to speak!These folks and others are probably not to happy about this recent turn of events. And who could blame them.)

I know I've been taken for task for complaining about the Fed payouts to the 9/11 victims, but this is why. Once you start, it's hard to stop. Some of the 9/11 families rcvd multi-million dollar government payouts. Unfortunately the ones that received these enormous sums were also the ones in the best position to bounce back from the tragedy in a purely financial way (I am not for a moment suggesting you can compensate for the loss of a loved one with money, because you can't). But these families were also the ones who were most likely to have other significant financial resources to pull from.

And since the future is dicey and uncertain with regard to the number and extent of natural and man-made disasters, it would seem the government would not want to get in the business of monetarily compensating victims -- such practices could easily and quickly drain the federal bank account (okay, I know you libs will point to other drains, and there are many, but this, too, over time could be a significant financial liability on behalf of the government).

My guess is that many of the people who even owned their own homes in New Orleans and the other areas hit by the hurricane, especially in the lower income neighborhoods, were probably underinsured. They may not have had flood insurance (you'd think it would be required for a mortgage and it usually is, but you can lapse on it pretty quickly...) nor windstorm insurance (I know when we lived in Fl we had three separate insurances to cover us from hurricane losses). I don't know how FEMA works with respect to providing money to people to rebuild -- is it through low cost loans? I just don't know.

So while I agree with you that the $2K was a nice gesture, it probably is not the best use of the money (perhaps there is/or should have been a daily limit on the card????). Even if each family managed it wisely, it's only a drop in the bucket with regard to what they will need over the coming weeks and months. And, again, it establishes a precedent I'm not sure the government should set.

[murphy]

Next time I'll simply blame an administration that is out of office, since that is what the Republicans usually do.

Please don't tell me that you as a democrat don't do the same (Bush Sr ring a bell?) with the caveat that you don't wait until they are out of office.


And I know there is plenty of blame to go around. No question the local/state folks could have done a much better job getting the poorest of the poor out, but after that levee broke it elevated to a new level (no pun intended) that only the feds would have the capability to deal with. And there was no leadership coordinating things. If you disagree, show me where I am wrong.

I asked you if you have reached out to an elected official you have supported and asked about this issue is all I said. My point was/is that the federal government is a body of democrats and republicans ALL responsible for actions that you and Mark and other LIBS on this board still point mostly in one mans direction. Yes the buck stops at his doorstep but there are alot of other doorsteps that are knocked on before that buck gets to him and behind some of the doorsteps a democrat may live [B]


I have an open mind.


[B] LOL :roll: :hah:


In fact, if you ever have anything to contribute to any of these discussions other than to say "David (and now Mark)...there you go bashing the administration again", please, feel free to add it.

I asked you a question did I not. My opinion is the blame for this goes a long way and includes many. Is that not adding soemthing?? :scratch:


I don't think she was blowing from what's under her skirt.

He probably would have left Monica back in Washington, but you can bet your ass he would have either been down there or overseeing rescue operations instead of playing guitar at a fundraiser. He also had professionals running FEMA, not other cowpokes, or horse rasslers or whatever this guy is.


Since Katrina did not happen on Clintons watch I will not bet my ass on his response. Since having Osama in our sites to be taken out DID happen on his watch I will bet my ass that he 2 buildings in NYC would still be standing if the professionals he had at his side actually been directed to act


Good luck tomorrow with TM.